I hope they follow that, he has stated the law correctly but would be a job of mammoth proportions to try and enforce a breach in court. In Britain there is no constitution, and everything not illegal is legal, including photography. The Terrorism Act is the first attempt to limit this, but as stated still hasn't covered public areas so any police officer who has stopped anyone for taking photos is guilty of something, probably false arrest is the only thing I can think of. Had an example gone to court and won then a precedent would be set, and in future case law would state that it is illegal for anyone to be stopped by the police for taking a photo, ie the law would be positive rather than implied. Without a new statute this law would remain unless either overruled by our new Supreme Court or Europe, although in this area there are no areas they can cover above our own highest court.
In practice though most police know the power they have over people and the people know the difficulty and expense involved in prosecuting the police. Given this stalemate it would allow the police to carry on as before if they choose simply as a) they aren't breaking any explicit law besides probably false arrest and b) their own colleagues aren't going to charge them so will rely on an individual taking the time and trouble to make a complaint and get a lawyer to take it on, probably as a private prosecution, which is hugely expensive and normally reserved for large organisations and millionaires. The police on the beat are well aware of this so as long as being virtually unenforceable except by their own superiors (who would only issue reprimands if complaints were issued in most cases) although more and more people will learn the law as it stands how many will be able to use it to stop the same thing when it happens and then prosecute the officer for doing so? And where are the witnesses as well, which would be essential to stand a chance of being taken on by a lawyer and winning a case? Until they made a law specifically outlawing harrassment of photographers I can see this dragging on. I'll add the constant objections from members of the public towards photography of them or their property, and if they then find a way of finding out who you are and making a complaint I'd still expect a knock on the door rather than the police simply explaining we'd done nothing against the law. Many people still tell me they believe it's illegal to photograph their house or children and as long as this mentality continues we'll keep getting harassed one way or another as the whole attitude has turned against photographers for some reason.
"The data doesn't matter. We're not basing our recommendations on the data. We're basing them on the climate models."
Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research